Acceptability and feasibility pilot randomised controlled trial of medical skin camouflage for recovery of women prisoners with self-harm scarring (COVER): the study protocol

Respect for bioethical principles and human rights in prisons: a systematic review on the state of the art

BACKGROUND

Respect for human rights and bioethical principles in prisons is a crucial aspect of society and is proportional to the well-being of the general population. To date, these ethical principles have been lacking in prisons and prisoners are victims of abuse with strong repercussions on their physical and mental health.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed, through a MESH of the following words (bioethics) AND (prison), (ethics) AND (prison), (bioethics) AND (jail), (ethics) AND (jail), (bioethics) AND (penitentiary), (ethics) AND (penitentiary), (prison) AND (human rights). Inclusion and exclusion criteria were defined and after PRISMA, 17 articles were included in the systematic review.

RESULTS

Of the 17 articles, most were prevalence studies (n.5) or surveys (n.4), followed by cross-sectional studies (n.3), qualitative studies (n.1), retrospective (n.1) and an explanatory sequential mixed-methods study design (n.1). In most cases, the studies associated bioethics with prisoners' access to treatment for various pathologies such as vaccinations, tuberculosis, hepatitis, HIV, it was also found that bioethics in prisons was related to the mental health of prisoners, disability, ageing, the condition of women, the risk of suicide or with the request for end-of-life by prisoners. The results showed shortcomings in the system of maintaining bioethical principles and respect for human rights.

CONCLUSIONS

Prisoners, in fact, find it difficult to access care, and have an increased risk of suicide and disability. Furthermore, they are often used as improper organ donors and have constrained autonomy that also compromises their willingness to have end-of-life treatments. In conclusion, prison staff (doctors, nurses, warders, managers) must undergo continuous refresher courses to ensure compliance with ethical principles and human rights in prisons.

Lived experience codesign of self-harm interventions: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to map existing literature describing how people with lived experience of self-harm have engaged in codesigning self-harm interventions, understand barriers and facilitators to this engagement, and how the meaningfulness of codesign has been evaluated.

DESIGN

Scoping review by Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. A protocol was published online (http://dx.doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/P52UD).

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PROSPERO, ClinicalTrials.gov and relevant websites were searched on 24 December 2022 (repeated 4 November 2023).

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included studies where individuals with lived experience of self-harm (first-hand or caregiver) have codesigned self-harm interventions.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Results were screened at title and abstract level, then full-text level by two researchers independently. Prespecified data were extracted, charted and sorted into themes.

RESULTS

We included 22 codesigned interventions across mobile health, educational settings, prisons and emergency departments. Involvement varied from designing content to multistage involvement in planning, delivery and dissemination. Included papers described the contribution of 159 female, 39 male and 21 transgender or gender diverse codesigners. Few studies included contributors from a minoritised ethnic or LGBTQIA+ group. Six studies evaluated how meaningfully people with lived experience were engaged in codesign: by documenting the impact of contributions on intervention design or through postdesign reflections. Barriers included difficulties recruiting inclusively, making time for meaningful engagement in stretched services and safeguarding concerns for codesigners. Explicit processes for ensuring safety and well-being, flexible schedules, and adequate funding facilitated codesign.

CONCLUSIONS

To realise the potential of codesign to improve self-harm interventions, people with lived experience must be representative of those who use services. This requires processes that reassure potential contributors and referrers that codesigners will be safeguarded, remunerated, and their contributions used and valued.

A Scarless Healing Tale: Comparing Homeostasis and Wound Healing of Oral Mucosa With Skin and Oesophagus

Epithelial tissues are the most rapidly dividing tissues in the body, holding a natural ability for renewal and regeneration. This ability is crucial for survival as epithelia are essential to provide the ultimate barrier against the external environment, protecting the underlying tissues. Tissue stem and progenitor cells are responsible for self-renewal and repair during homeostasis and following injury. Upon wounding, epithelial tissues undergo different phases of haemostasis, inflammation, proliferation and remodelling, often resulting in fibrosis and scarring. In this review, we explore the phenotypic differences between the skin, the oesophagus and the oral mucosa. We discuss the plasticity of these epithelial stem cells and contribution of different fibroblast subpopulations for tissue regeneration and wound healing. While these epithelial tissues share global mechanisms of stem cell behaviour for tissue renewal and regeneration, the oral mucosa is known for its outstanding healing potential with minimal scarring. We aim to provide an updated review of recent studies that combined cell therapy with bioengineering exporting the unique scarless properties of the oral mucosa to improve skin and oesophageal wound healing and to reduce fibrotic tissue formation. These advances open new avenues toward the ultimate goal of achieving scarless wound healing.